Left Wing Media Bias Essay Example

There is fake news that everyone can prove to be false, and there is something worse: media bias. The latter happens when media houses conspire to create a certain narrative rather than offer a balanced view of what is happening. In the US and many other developed nations, most media tends houses to be liberal and left leaning. In the age of the presidency of Donald Trump, the bias of left wing media has been laid bare as networks scramble to create narratives that suit their own predetermined objectives rather than inform the masses. The left wing media bias is tantamount to an individual who makes the following statement: "I believe that my dog is the best dog in the world, quite the statement no doubt about it. Here are a few reasons why: he has the best character of any dog that I have ever met; he is also more than one bread and lastly, he is totally domesticated. These are just three of the great reasons that he is definitely the best dog in the world." This paper will explore bias in left wing media by making a reference to the above statement.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Like a dog owner who believes that his is the best dog in the world, left wing media house are already sure of their greatness, even when they get some facts wrong. Their basis for this assumption is simple: most prominent media houses are left wing. Therefore, given that such media has been in existence for a long time, it can only be as a result of the fact that they offer nothing but unbiased content to their audience. After all, if they were not the best in the world, they would have been driven out of business by right-leaning media (Stern, 2017). While this argument might be appealing, it is deceptive. Just like there are other dogs in the world that one may never have come across, there are other media houses too - some right-leaning - who do just as good (if not better jobs), when it comes to reporting current affairs.

Not too long ago, The Times newspaper found itself on the receiving end after publishing a photograph that misled readers. The photograph depicted a crying toddler as president Trump stood by, simply looking with derision. The story sought to paint the picture that the child had been separated from their family as a result of the zero-tolerance immigration policy. It emerged later that the child depicted in the photo had not actually been separated from their parents. In its defence, The Times declared that it stood with its editors, because the image sought to tell a broader story of family separations, even if the child depicted had not been the recipient of such policy. In all fairness, this was a biased depiction of the situation at hand that sought to infuriate the paper's audience. It was tailored to spark a certain reaction, not necessarily tell the story as it was. Like a dog owner who declared that his dog "has the best character of any dog that I have ever met," the newspaper refuted any claims that its editor could be biased. It insisted that such an editor could not possibly have any other reason but telling the story as it was, even when there was evidence that at the very least, it was a case of agenda-setting taken too far.

A dog owner proving that his is the best dog in the world will declare that "he is also more than one bread," meaning that crossbreeding has improved quality, leading to better outcomes. This argument is common in left wing media, with the claim being that they rely on an army of experts and analysts, hence reducing the possibilities of the existence of bias. Channels like CNN will boast of countless of experts, analysts and academics that come in to offer commentary on reports, ensuring that a balanced approach is maintained when it comes to news reporting. While many analysts and commentators certainly amount to good policy, there is no evidence that they are selected randomly. Therefore, it could be that they come from a certain segment of the population that holds similar views. As a result, they are likely to agree on almost all issues (Montgomery & Smith, 2016). Even when they disagree, it will be in such a manner that those disagreeing will seem weaker, more like when an author creates an antagonist who exists to magnify the character of the protagonist. In this way, left wing media insinuates as much as it reports, creating perceptions that resonate with the audience. The army of reporters, analysts, commentators and academics thus serve to add little, if any, value at all, because the nature of reporting is already predetermined. The claim of diversity and broad perspectives therefore fails to hold, leading to sustained bias that is reinforced as stories are picket from one network to another. Most left wing media houses reference one another, deepening bias in the process.

Watching and reading commentary from left wing media, one cannot fail to notice the perception of superiority. It is as if such media houses believe that right wing media cannot be relied upon, because they have been compromised. Left wing media will deny this claim, but the reality is that they present themselves as ones that should be relied because their coverage is more progressive. Like a dog owner who believes that his dog "is totally domesticated" hence the most well-behaved and refined, left wing media portray an air of superiority that their reportage is beyond reproach. It is not common to hear CNN anchors hint at the fact that Fox News is simply too biased to be believed. Again, this may be true, yet this is not the issue here - the argument is in the way that this perception is communicated, with an air of elitism.

It is important to note that with the Trump presidency, right wing media houses have defended the indefensible. As a result, they have rightly been called out for doing so. However, left wing media houses like CNN and Washington Post have not made the situation better. Sometimes they have concentrated on issues that are trivial. Most importantly, they have basked in the glory of their own reporting. Like a dog owner who flatters his dog too much, they have praised and defended their own coverage. At times, agenda-setting has been done in manner that presents the issues at hand in a biased way. The overall outcome has been an increase in instances of bias. Liberal media continues to deny its own biases, meaning that as of present, there is no likelihood that the documented instances of bias will be remedied.

References

Montgomery, D., & Smith, S. (2016). Evidence of liberal media bias in front-page Trump story? Retrieved July 21, 2018, from The Denver Post: https://www.denverpost.com/2016/08/12/evidence-of-liberal-media-bias-in-front-page-trump-story-2-letters/

Stern , K. (2017). Former NPR CEO opens up about liberal media bias. Retrieved July 21, 2018, from New York Post: https://nypost.com/2017/10/21/the-other-half-of-america-that-the-liberal-media-doesnt-cover/